Man, the rich get richer, no? Even the name of this week’s Masters event, the title of this post, makes me a little queasy. So, what are Fedal up to this week?
Who has the bumpier route to that tight hug at the net with his BFF in the proposed final followed likely by a hug on his wrist of another Rolex watch?
Pouille/Fognini – the Fog beat the Frenchman who had a couple of MPs on Rafa in Beijing.
Then Nadal meets the winner of this ________________.
Kyrgios/Johnson – Kyrgios crashed and burned again, against Johnson. Sad? Here’s my analysis of the Kyrgios collapse. Redundant? Of course it is.
Goffin – solid run from the Belgian, for sure. Need to see him beat Fedal before we can get too excited here, though I am very happy for that country’s tennis fans.
Then Federer meets the survivor of this four-top. Yum.
Should be some decent tennis on these quick hard courts, supposedly the fastest on the tour. But even that discussion just seems so pointless at this point.
Nonetheless, enjoy the tennis.
14 thoughts on “Shanghai Rolex Masters 2017”
Lately I’ve been trying to consider whether playing more ATP 250s could possibly extend Federer’s career, let him experiment more, feel less stress, etc.
Do you think that might be good for him?
What’s his goal at this point? To challenge at majors and masters and stay in the top 5, at least? If that’s his goal, he has to stay fit and relatively dominant. Playing more 250s would be the counter to that. Basel he plays for obvious reasons, but I don’t think you’ll find him hanging around those kinds of venues. If he’s not competing in the rankings, it’s exhibition time for Roger.
Well I’ll defer to your superior knowledge and judgment, of course. My thought was that Roger would incur less wear and tear by playing in easier tournaments, and enjoy more opportunities to experiment along the way.
I was surprised at how he faded at the US Open, since he’d had a fairly easy schedule – I don’t think he’s played fewer matches in any year this century – but I also realize that back issues can crop up suddenly, and may have very little to do with miles traveled.
I’ve been very pleased with his results this year, and we all know that the future is uncertain. And I’m only a tennis neophyte; however, I do have the impression that Connors had a longer career – and more wins and titles than Federer – due in part to his playing in more 250s. Just sayin’ …
“Superior knowledge and judgment.” My blog’s bullshit detector let-out a little beep when that comment was published.
I don’t think Federer changes much. There are some 250s that draw the big boys, but those are more or less junior tournaments, so to speak. These old dogs have to rest, as we know, for the more meaningful tennis.
The tour is so much more physical now than when Connors played.
As for the U.S. Open, indeed his back went out on him. That was a very forgettable tournament. Really one of the worst given the way the field folded-up pre tournament, during, etc. Again, even uncle Toni was unimpressed.
Ha, maybe I should work on complimenting more effectively! 🙂
Let’s see, first of all, I’m something of a student of the psyche (my actual ed.is in Physics and Engineering Mgt – but “psyche stuff” is much more important than a formal credential in most cases).
I suspect that you too are a student of the psyche Matt. Is it so? What do you teach btw? I hope you won’t mind my asking. I do realize that you may be much more than a student.
In any event, I’ve read a lot of Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Thomas Moore, and others over the years. For about ten years, I read their writings every spare minute I had. Ha, that makes me a layman!
But I was impressed by a lot of what I read, and I could write about it for hours 🙂 But I won’t! 🙂
Instead, I’ll just say that encountering one’s own shadow, and what Jung calls “confronting the counter-position” in some of his writing, are central principles in my layman’s paradigm. I have a feeling you’re familiar with all this…
This is turning into a long-winded way of saying that my compliment was very sincere! But I hope you know that it was.
Let me put it this way: Please don’t start agreeing with me just to be polite (irony intended)! When you disagree, I learn a lot more than I do when you agree with something I posted! In cases of agreement, I suspect I (consciously or not) smugly congratulate myself, and tell myself something like “Yep, Matt and I are two darn smart guys!” 😉
In closing, let me offer a completely tangential compliment about how much I liked a suggestion you made a while back, to the effect that we have some spirited disagreements on your blog. I just hope it’s not too obsequious for me to end with that!
I emailed you answering a couple of questions.
Check your junk mail, I guess. And if that’s not your email address,
at least I tried.
Aren’t you excited about the Shanghai result?
I would already be very pleased with Goffin’s perf if he could qualify for London and make a decent appearance there. He doens’t have to beat Fedal to do that I think.
In any case David is moving up in the rankings and not down, and is in my view bound to win more and bigger in the future, step by step.
I know he doesn’t have to beat Fedal, but that would be a tremendous touch. He’s had a great year. Between Goffin and your international soccer side, you have to be pretty excited.
Tough to see the Netherlands fail to qualify for the WC. It’s time for Belgium to make something happen in that sport. They have some quality players.
I’m ineed a bit excited, but don’t want to get overexcited. We’re a small country and need to stay humble.
By the way we have a very talented young female player going up in the ranking in WTA. She will play team up with David Goffin to play in the Hopman Cup next january in Australia.
I predict that Belgium *could* go the England way precisely because of the embarrassment of talent at their disposal and the lack of a coherent, clear football vision.
The atp should cancel the rest of this year’s scheduled events and replace them with a series of nadal v federer games. They could have warmup/sideshow acts featuring the other players. Zverev-Delpo is a good example of the sort of match that raises mildly interesting questions. Or let Kyrgios play a bunch of random players (or the same opponent repeatedly) so that we can try to figure out if there’s any pattern to the results.
But rafa and roger are the only real game in town. The rest have shown now beyond any doubt that the most they can do is play spoiler and get in the way of the only meaningful final. There’s no one out there looking to come for the king(s).
Maybe next year zverev can take another step and in a couple of years some of the younger guys will grow into the sort of ruthless machine that is needed to topple the throne. More likely it will be djokovic who will resume his reign next year (though he will have to work hard to wrest the crown from rafa’s grasp). But please keep writing Matt!
Cheers, Clint. I’ll keep writing if you keep reading and commenting. Deal?
The tour is simply an embarrassment. We talked about this when Djokovic was dominating a couple of years ago. Roger appeared to be sliding into retirement and Nadal looked absolutely horrible. And there was NO ONE other than an occasional Stanimal who might challenge Novak.
Now it’s Fedal’s turn. Nadal looks unbeatable, which by itself is bizarre.
The youth is so far away from meaningful dominance. Absurd.
Pingback: Shanghai 2017 Fedal Preview | Mcshow Blog